Reaction to Pope Francis

There are a number of negative reactions to the election of Pope Francis. From the Traditional point of view one might well have read the fact that he appeared at the Balcony without the rochet and mozzetta, along with the absence of Traditional Masses in Buenos Aires, as signifying an aversion to Tradition. Really, such an aversion remains to be seen since he has been Pope less than a week. To be honest, I find it hard to imagine that anyone moving to high office in the Church would do so in contempt for the Church’s past and the right of the faithful to their heritage, so I expect to see the trajectory in the recovery of doctrine and liturgy put in place by John Paul II and Benedict XVI respectively, continued. Indeed, to try to remodel the Church by obstructing or abandoning her heritage would be to try to remodel the Church in one’s own image. Not a sign of holiness, I venture to say, so I do not expect to see such a remodelling.

What is of note is that on each of the first two days of his pontificate Pope Francis has spoken of the devil, indicating an awareness that we are in battle against the forces of darkness. This may be good news for Traditional Catholics who hold a great place in their spiritual lives for the prayer of St Michael, but a worry for liberals who would rather leave behind the idea that there is a personal devil who is engaging in a warfare against the Church of Christ. There is also the report that as Cardinal, Pope Francis criticised liberation ‘theology’ and was a voice against homosexual marriage, contraception and abortion as part of the human rights agenda.

We are told that Pope Francis is very much a man of collegiality. I do worry that if this is true he will disempower himself as Pope, but he cannot easily dispempower the Papacy if he takes the teaching of Vatican II seriously, for eventually a succeeding Pope will take to heart the Council’s teaching that

the body or college of bishops has no authority unless it is understood together with the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter as its head. The pope's power of primacy over all, both pastors and faithful, remains whole and intact. In virtue of his office, that is as Vicar of Christ and pastor of the whole Church, the Roman Pontiff has full, supreme and universal power over the Church. And he is always free to exercise this power. The order of bishops, which succeeds to the college of apostles and gives this apostolic body continued existence, is also the subject of supreme and full power over the universal Church, provided we understand this body together with its head the Roman Pontiff and never without this head.(27*) This power can be exercised only with the consent of the Roman Pontiff. 

The individual bishops, who are placed in charge of particular churches, exercise their pastoral government over the portion of the People of God committed to their care, and not over other churches nor over the universal Church. (Lumen gentium 22, 23, emphasis added).

In regard to the liturgy of the Church –which is a most important aspect of the Popes responsibility since it is in the liturgy that God is worshipped, the people formed and sanctified, and Catholic identity individually assimilated and publicly expressed, surely there is little to fear? The damage was done by Bugnini and his cohorts and the wild implementation they fostered and allowed in the early days of the reform. What we can hope for from Francis is that he does nothing to derail the reform of the reform. I am not so concerned that he will suppress Summorum Pontificum since he must surely be aware that the traditional liturgy is a heritage of the Catholic people to which they have a right, that rights are not to be suppressed, and that his authority is “to build and not to destroy” (2 Cor,13v10). So there is hope for the future. I hope.

Pope Francis -Called To Re-build But Likely To Re-Design?

We all, of course, promise respect and obedience to the new Pope, Francis. But there is already much talk about the man as being no friend of Tradition. Can this really be so, when Vatican II reminded us is part of the Deposit of Faith on a par with Sacred Scripture? Surely no one who accepts the Papal Office does so with the desire to change what has been received from the Apostles and its legitimate development down the centuries? Who would have such arrogance or absence of faith to act in such a manner? At any rate, my hope is that the people of God will realise that Francis is Vicar of Christ and as such, owed our obedience and respect. That said, if the fears expressed by others are justified, then I hope that Francis will, in his turn, give his faithful obedience to the Tradition of the Church.  

Unfortunately, for many Catholics today Tradition is regarded simply as custom, and therefore easily abandoned. We must then, as always, trust in the Holy Spirit and offer filial prayers for Pope Francis -not only for his person, but for his Pontificate, that he may demonstrate his firm adherence to the Deposit of Faith in Scripture and Tradition, and thereby serve as both a rallying point for the faithful and firm rebuke to the secular world.

We trust God will use Pope Francis to re-build the Church as he did with his name-sake from Assisi, and pray that he will not try to remodel what does not belong to him. A Pope is not, after all, all-powerful, and the new man surely knows this. Rather, he is caretaker of the Lord’s Body and not its master. One trusts, as all must do, that Francis is indeed aware that Our Lord “is the same yesterday, today and forever” (Heb.13v8) and as such does not speak doctrine or guide liturgical development with forked tongue: what was sacred before is sacred now -be that in doctrine or in liturgy. I feel sure Francis has the humility and wisdom to lead the Church authentically and remains open to the promptings of the Holy Ghost, faithful to the Tradition we have received. And who could suggest he does not..?

Disappointed with EWTN...

I have encouraged Father to purchase several DVD sets and books from EWTN, and he himself has encouraged our parish, via our weekly newsletter, to watch EWTN. We agree that many of its programmes are of superb formative value, and would like to see EWTN viewed in every Catholic home –and more besides. But EWTN does have its problems. Here in the UK programme schedules can be wrong several times in a week, and there are oddities in the liturgy of their daily Mass (motets to the Blessed Virgin during Holy Communion when we ought to be directing our attention to the Lord, for example. But that is for another post...) What disturbs me the most is the network’s obsession with John-Paul II. Throughout the entire papacy of Benedict XVI they seemed unable to refer to the reigning Pontiff without referring also to John-Paul II.

Now I, like Father, am very grateful to JP II for his oversight of the Catechism for the tying down of the Faith which had been so distorted by influential theologians after Vatican II. We are, I think I can safely say, also grateful for Inaestimabile Donum (1980) and especially for Redemptionis sacramentum (2005) by which he addressed abuses in the liturgy, though I do wish he had applied these to his own liturgies. But I think that, having began life as an actor early in his adult life, and having retained a charismatic personality, he became a Pope we went to see rather than hear, and since a Pope is primarily a teacher, not a performer, JP II’s charismatic character may have hindered the reception of his teaching.

Being such a charismatic personality one can see why he had such an effect upon EWTN.  In that many of the presenters appear to have had him as their only Pope since they converted or reverted to The Faith, their connection to him as their spiritual father is to be expected, but the network’s obsession with JP seems to me quite marked, with frequent references to JP II as ‘The Great’. Personally, I cannot refer to a Pope who kissed the Koran as ‘Great’; I think the message he conveyed in that gesture is to be regretted since this is an act we reserve for the Word of God in the Sacred Scriptures.

Well, we now have EWTN’s The World Over Live programme suggesting Cardinal Dolan is a likely Pope. I do hope Cardinal Dolan does not become another EWTN obsession, though I suspect he already is, since his jolly character is quite intense (I cannot help but think of Mr Tickle when I see him)! But like JP II, such an external characteristic can get in the way of the message, which is unhelpful.  If Cardinal Dolan is elected Pope we might get some respite from EWTN’s obsession with JP II, though I suspect it will be a case of saying how well he embodies the spirit and style of JP II. That may be true in more ways than one, for while JP II kissed the Koran, we have the much regretted memory of Cardinal Dolan being ever-so chummy with Obama at the Al Smith Dinner last year. An interesting note on this can be found here on LifeSiteNews.

So come on EWTN; let the Holy Ghost get on with the anointing...you may just get the man you seem to favour. 

Praying The Cardinals Will be Wise Enough And Humble Enough

The Cardinals preparing for the Conclave will surely take seriously the fact that they are being called to elect a successor of Peter as Vicar of Christ. I hope they also take seriously the need to elect a man who can strengthen Holy Mother Church’s realignment on the rails in the hermeneutic of continuity. It is, after all, undeniable that she has wobbled on those rails for the last fifty years in both her doctrine and her worship. John-Paul II began the recovery of doctrine by publishing the Catechism; Benedict XVI began the recovery of the Liturgy. We need a man who can consolidate these recoveries -and prevent Episcopal Conferences and the Roman Curia from stifling the emergence of the real Vatican II.

Sadly, many clergy formed in the liberal days of the 1960’s and 70’s, together with the progeny these folk formed, raise their voices against the Church’s teaching on contraception, same-gender marriage, the hierarchical Church etc. They don’t seem to realise (or else they refuse to acknowledge) that that the Faith, delivered once and for all, cannot change: “Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints” (Jude 1v3). Even when the Faith is applied in new ways to new situations it cannot change: what was true before is true now; what was error before is error now: “Christ is the same yesterday today and forever” (Heb.13v8).

As for liturgy this has, in my estimation, become a community gathering for fraternal affirmation rather than the worship of God. While the latter is not deliberately excluded by celebrants, it is surely down-graded: ask what motivates a celebrant to celebrate Mass as he does (facing the people; Communion in the nave rather than from the sanctuary; wandering around for the sign of peace and the use of ‘hip’ hymns etc) and he will likely say “it is good for the folks”. He thereby has the effect upon the congregation his primary concern, yet the primary object of liturgy is not the affirmation of the people but the worship of God by adoration, thanksgiving, propitiation and supplication, with its unseen impact on souls ("Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers the prophets, and of all who keep the words of this book. Worship God!" Rev.22v9). To think we give God adoration and propitiation by making the people our focus is to miss the mark of genuine liturgy.

My hope for the up-coming Conclave then is that the Cardinals will be wise enough and humble enough to choose the man the Holy Spirit points out rather than the man who embodies their own political Churchmanship; a man of deep prayer and commitment to things eternal who will consolidate what the Holy Ghost seems to have clearly begun by the Catechism of John-Paul II and the Liturgical Reform of Benedict XVI.

The Death & Resurrection of Confession

Bishop Cunningham has asked every parish in the Diocese to make Confession available on the Wednesday evenings of Lent during a one hour Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament. It was a most worthwhile event last week, with some of those who never attend our Sunday Rosary & Benediction spending some time in the Presence of the Lord. In one easy move, the importance of Confession and Eucharistic Adoration was proclaimed. But it has left me with a question: if all the parishes are having Exposition and Confessions during the six weeks of Lent, will we need any Reconciliation Services before Easter?  In fact, I wonder if we should provide them at all since they tend to diminish the sense of personal sin and the need for regular, individual Confession; people simply wait for Lent and Advent to confess. This, with the omission the topics of sin, Confession and the Four Last Things from our preaching, gives the impression that sin is rare and that ‘the pit’ does not exist, leaving the folk and the failing preacher all the more likely to fall into the pit. Have we forgotten that while Holy Mother Church is holy as a community because she indwelt by the Holy Ghost, that she is sinful in her individual members?

Further, too many folk have gained the impression that Confession once or twice a year is enough to keep them holy. I wonder about this, since progression in personal holiness cannot be obtained by fulfilment of the minimum and doing everything as a community. Without denying the reality of the Church as one body, the over-emphasis on community has, I think, damaged us spiritually. It can be remedied by restoring individual Confession to its rightful place.

Celebration of Mass has also fallen prey to an over-emphasis on community, being celebrated with gimmicks such as comedic homilies, drama, dance and the signing of ‘Happy Birthday’. I truly believe we need a return to Mass celebrated versus Deum from the Offertory onwards, and to solid catechesis on the Mass as our thanksgiving, propitiation and supplication of Almighty God, rather than celebration of the giftedness of the community. Additionally, there needs to be a reawakening of the intimate connection between the Eucharist and Confession, for while the Eucharist makes present the Sacrifice by which grace comes into the world, Confession applies that grace to our soul, making us worthy to receive the Eucharist.

All in all, I cannot help but hope there are no Reconciliation Services in Lent this year and that they tail off in the future, because the only way to restore the sense of sin and take seriously the call to holiness is for the individual to practice regular, well-prepared, personal Confession, thereby ensuring frequent and worthy reception of Holy Communion.

God alone can judge me

“God alone can judge me” is apparently becoming popular as a tattoo. Although it is just a fashion thing, it neatly captures the attitude of today’s secularist society and is might well be adopted by secularist forces to disarm Catholics in their criticism of today’s alternative or aberrant lifestyle choices, such as homosexual activity (today's hot topic), co-habitation, contraception, abortion and euthanasia.

Sporting this tattoo does not mean the wearer is

following an alternative lifestyle; it can be a simple

statement of adherence to Gospel values; or a

statement that the wearer trusts themselves to a

‘higher power’, or an important reminder to us all

not to judge other people.

The tattoo is in fact, accurate: God alone judges persons. Yet it omits to add “and God has revealed the criteria by which I will be judged”. Remembering that God is the self-existing life-force of the universe from which all created life springs, acts which are uncooperative with His design for the transmission of created life (such as IVF and surrogacy) as well as acts which exclude the transmission of life (such as homosexual acts and artificial contraception) and acts which directly attack created life (such as abortion, euthanasia, violence) are intrinsically incongruent with God. Persons who knowingly, freely and deliberately engage in such acts thus put themselves in danger of forming their character in a way which is incongruent with God and Heaven. But it is for God to judge people, not others, and this is neatly summed up in the tattoo. 

It is not that God will send souls who have formed themslves into incongruence with Him to Hell. Indeed, “God wills that all men be saved” (1 Tim.2v4), but if one deliberately, knowingly and freely forms one’s character in a way that is incongruent with God and Heaven, His judgement can only ratify that incongruence. The Church points this out to souls for their eternal good; to give them reason for disavowing disordered, harmful instincts. I do then, wish the mass media would stop portraying the Catholic Church as judging and oppressing people: the Church does not judge people but acts, for the good of people.  Indeed, we recognise that homosexual persons; those who contracept and those who abort etc, can be loving and kindly in their personality, and that they can contribute greatly in their professional life to the good of society. It is simply that we want to save their souls for Heaven by advising them against acting-out disordered thinking and passions.

That word ‘disordered’ has offended many in relation to homosexual and contraceptive activity, but as has been pointed out by others, if homosexual acts and contraceptive acts are normal, that must mean heterosexual sex and sex which is open to life are abnormal. That is nonsense, because sex is by nature reproductive. With this in mind, the claim that homosexuality is ‘natural’ to someone is false. It may indeed be something the person perceives as embedded in their character, but in that it is not something natural to the human animal it is disordered, and ought not to be affirmed and ‘fed’ by anyone, be they sociologists, psychologists or Governments. Souls should be helped to seek after their higher instincts, not fall prey to their disordered impulses -they are worth more than that.

So while it is true to say “God alone can judge me”, we do have to keep in mind that He has made known the criteria by which He will judge: it is found written in the biological nature of man; in the scriptures and the teaching of His Church which speaks with His voice (“He who hears you, hears Me”, Luke 10v6). We ignore His criteria at our peril. The sooner Governments around the world return to adhering to what is written in nature and scripture the better -for their own salvation and the salvation of those they claim to be liberating.

It is useful to remind ourselves here that it is just as perilous to ignore God’s other criteria too: we must keep the Sabbath holy (attend Sunday Mass and avoid servile works); we must refuse to kill (by refusing to support violence, abortion, euthanasia); we must stay clear of stealing (which includes oppression of the poor by Governments failing to provide adequate housing, health care and education; employers failing to provide workers with a just wage) and avoid false witness (detraction, calumny, gossip and insult).

In speaking of insult I want to add what I advise many a person: if you are in a situation of gossip, try at least to say “Well, I can’t criticise because I have my own faults”. Better still, note a good quality you have seen in the person who is the object of the gossip. If you are in a discussion about life-style choices, listen to the argument of your opponent, then have your say without getting into criticising persons. Acts we may and must criticise, but without judging the person or making disparaging remarks about them –we must, after all,  do the truth in charity (Eph.4v15). 

Lent; New Life & Pope Benedict

As we begin Lent we need to ensure we understand the season. Yes it’s a time for self-denial, but it’s more than simply giving things up as a six week period of penance: it is a time to ‘repent’; a time to change our ways; a time to be re-made in Christ. Our liturgical commemoration of His Passion, Death and Resurrection will be a merely ritualistic, external commemoration if it isn’t made real in our own lives; if we don’t die to self and rise from our sins to new life in Him. To die to self can indeed include giving up TV or chocolate, but it should also be about seeking -through prayer, penance and charity to others- an eradication of our sinful habits and attitudes by putting into place their opposite, virtuous habits under the grace and Lordship of Christ.

Thus, if laziness is our sin we need to spend lent building the habit of industriousness and diligence; if lack of prayer is our sin then we need to discipline ourselves to a set time of each day to bring to God our praise, our apologies for sin; our hopes and our needs; if gossip is our sin, we need to build the virtue of affirming the good in those who are the object of gossip (or at the very least, build the habit of holding our tongue while admitting that “I cannot criticise because I have my own faults”). Lent will be successful for us only if we end it as a new person, remade by the grace of God and our cooperation with that grace.

We will be celebrating Easter this year under a new Pope following the resignation of Pope Benedict on grounds of age and ill-health. Be aware that a Pope resigning or retiring is envisaged by the Church in Canon 332 §2 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, and that this is not the first time a Pope has resigned: Benedict IX resigned in 1045; Pope Celestine V resigned in 1294 after only a few months in office, and Pope Gregory resigned in 1425. 

It does leave a danger of course: it may mean a future Pope will be pressured into resigning by his opposition, and all Popes have had their opponents. We need now to pray for Pope Benedict; for the Cardinals who will elect his successor; for whoever is elected, and for the whole Church. I admit I am disappointed Pope Benedict will no longer hold the Petrine Office, but he has given his reasons -and may have reasons of which we are, as yet, unaware. In any case, who are we to judge? Surely if a Parish Priest or a Bishop can retire on grounds of ill-health or advanced age, why not a Pope?